She could have recognized the potential for perceived bias and recused herself.
Being the fan of a team probably doesn't rise to the level that someone would have to recuse themselves. I've seen recusal used for professional, familial or financial interests being called into question, not rooting interest.
I would say that impartiality is the overriding concern, and it seems odd to me that her team benefits from the punishment whereas a division rival does not.
Ross Tucker said this AM that Goodell seems to make his penalty first then work backwards to justify it.
That makes sense in this case - Hardy got paid his full 13.1 M 2014 salary while playing one game out of 16 because he was on the Commissioner's exempt list. That seems like a mistake on Goodell's part, way too light because he was vacillating while he was trying to figure the whole domestic abuse thing.
So he adds on 4 games without pay over the 6 game guideline for a first offense. And I anticipate that Goodell will say that there are other prior incidents that just didn't end up in court (and he's correct, this thug has a pattern of this behavior).
It's like the Rice thing where Goodell was too light at first, heard the public outcry, then took Rice out for the year. Big difference between the now suggested 6 games and a whole season.
I'm not saying these second penalties are too harsh - personally I think Hardy should not be allowed to play at all this year- it's just that Goodell doesn't have a clue and now is trying to look tough because he botched these cases last year.
Alex Smith will play again for the Skins. When and how well is unknown.